Nikon's New D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR

Nikon D5 and D500 Push the Boundaries of DSLR

It's worth emphasizing here something Nikon clearly emphasized in their press conference: one of the true advantages of a DSLR over current mirrorless cameras is the lack of viewfinder lag and the true view of the scene - at least in between mirror blackouts - compared to the typical stop-motion sequence of last-shot images most mirrorless cameras exhibit during fast bursts. This simply makes it easier to follow action with an optical viewfinder than with a mirrorless camera, which is why in the video screenshot above, the photographer was able to maintain the center AF point over his subject with the D5, while missing the subject with the 'mirror-less' camera example on the left. It's worth noting though that Nikon's own 1-series cameras provide a live feed even during continuous shooting, which actually circumvents this shortcoming of mirrorless (hint: that's how mirrorless cameras will undoubtedly address this issue in the future).

DSLRs have also been optimized to make quick phase-detect AF measurements in between those quick mirror blackouts, allowing cameras like the D5 and Canon's 1D X to acquire AF almost instantaneously even during 12 and 11 fps bursts. Impressive to say the least. That's not to say mirrorless cameras aren't catching up - in good light, Samsung's NX1 can often successfully continuously refocus at 15 fps. Which means, yes, we do have to call out Nikon for suggesting that all mirrorless cameras have 'soft and slow AF': we can't help but wonder if in that particular video sequence, the Sony Alpha series camera were left in AF-S, as cameras like the a7R II can, in fact, successfully refocus on approaching subjects (and when it can't, the box doesn't remain green as it does in the out-of-focus example in the Nikon press conference video - unless the focus mode is left in AF-S).

Regardless, though, with mirrorless cameras you're still left with the issue of difficulty in following the subject without a live view during bursts.

To our knowledge, there isn't any - part of the reason we're less excited about the video capabilities of these cameras. Especially since AF in video on Nikon DSLRs tends to be unusable during actual filming.

Thanks for this reference. Folks. This guy tested the d-5 for Nikon shooting bears in Alaska, and many birds and other animals in the Falkland Islands and South Georgia. Go see the site just for the photos.

I agree about the basic principle of 'need'..you don't NEED the iPhone 6s you are using to post here either, or the car that does 145mph, or the 50inch HD tv, nor, indeed a coat capable or resising 300 meters of water pressure, but, progress must continue for a healthy economy, and although there are, for the experienced, work arounds for slow autofocus, having a system that is foolproof is a real asset. Sometimes the old hands grumble a bit because, I suspect, they are just a bit sad that the D500 wasn't around when they were lads and lasses?The good thing is, that tech washes down to more affordable products, so that now, most of us can buy something that will take great pics, and this has to be a good thing.

Thank you Sony for shaking the market and push the big giants to update their lineups. We still awaiting Canon to come up with something really dazzling and bring out an all around products and resolve DR lacks. The release of Nikon's D5 & D500 also should motivate Sony to come up with something even more challenging and spectacular in the next generations release of A 77, a 7 series and maybe A 99.

The new Nikons are unquestionably great cameras. Apart from "professionals", who uses anyone of these cameras enough to justify spending the extra $? The other issue is the lenses. I have been using cameras and lenses for over 40 years and I think lens quality has actually regressed at the professional end. Sure we have better AF, but most lenses now need serious computer rejigging to compensate for distortions and other aberrations. When will Nikon create a standard lens with the corner to corner sharpness and a distortion free horizon?

Sure, software can correct a lot of the distortion but there is nothing to compare with the best lenses designed to suffice without it. I mostly use exposure bracketed frames for HDR and choose which software to use to read my RAW frames and merge them based entirely upon the quality of the tonal mapping of the result. That conflicts with lenses needing software correction, although by first converting to DNG 1.1 the Adobe RAW converter does incorporate distortion correction.

I think you are both remembering through rose coloured glasses.I look at old photos now - not amateur photos, but photos from books or magazines etc, and see chromatic aberation, distortion, blurriness etc etc.

Not saying there might not have been some great lenses - and frankly I don't have the experience from then to know.

But looking at the majority of the images from back then, I'd say the majority of lenses were not as good.

Ultimately the D500 question will be whether the sum total of all its technology adds up to better pictures... comparing the D5500 and 5200 and 5300 predecessors, which are, by the way, great cameras, Nikon APS-c sensors have not advanced much in the past three years. Comparing to the same priced D750 the question is going to be whether in real world shooting, you take an IQ hit in low light. To me this camera is going to have to show some significant advance in image quality over prior APS-C cameras. A key element is going to be the sensor. Not much publicity about the sensor, but hoping Nikon is using Sony's new BSI CMOS sensor technology. If it does I think the camera will be on everyone's list.

Apart from professionals or highly demanding and skilled amateurs to whom the leading equipment obviously is of benefit for some kinds of subject, I am convinced that the majority of people spending a lot of money do so principally because of the pride of ownership, not because they need expensive cameras to take great pictures. You only have to look into the galleries to see that the vast majority of the results there could be taken with a decent, slightly better than entry level DSLR, mirrorless system camera or good bridge camera. Even a true 1/1.6" or smaller would often suffice if it is a good one and many of them are.

I have a fairly large print of a picture my son took in China with an Olympus C-5060 and it would have been no better taken with anything better whatsoever today.

The D5 and D500 will make it easier to capture fast moving subjects more sharply and for those regularly into that, they have to be of interest. But who else actually needs either of them?

AU, image quality is just one factor when deciding what camera to use. The D500 is geared toward professionals... 10 fps for 200 shots. D7200/5500/5200 can't get out of its their way compared to that. Those cameras bury too many often-needed functions in the menu system instead of allowing you to change them quickly with a button or thumbwheel or whatever. We haven't seen good samples yet, but my guess is the high ISO performance will be outstanding. So the image quality will be there, but in the form of less noise at high ISO, not the number of pixels. I shoot a lot of images for magazines and have double truck spreads in glossy editions shot with my D300s and they look amazing...and that's 12MP.

Pete: Agree with you 100%; Different from you I'm just a semi-retired guy who takes a lot of pictures, and can afford good cameras. For me the new camera will be great with faster, more accurate focus, for kids, pets, waves and whatever. I like what I see of the D500 partly because it's small and its lenses will be smaller than ff. I love the web because I can share my pictures with my friends and family; it brings us all closer together, and better pictures make the process that much more enjoyable. For me, the challenge of APS-c is low light/ high ISO, because of the number of pictures I take in not so good conditions. The mp of this camera is plenty enough for me, but as I said, I am looking for iq equal to my D750 in low light.

If you want smaller with great IQ and smaller lenses you should really consider the Fuji X-Pro2 that was just released. You can switch from optical to electronic viewfinder, it's got an incredible AF sensor array that now includes focus tracking, 24MP resolution, high ISO performance and the lenses are as good as you can buy...period. Much better choice of prime focal lengths for DX than Nikon or Canon. And the zooms are good if that's what you're into. I'm really considering going with this for my work. I'll probably keep the Nikon for some types of shoots, but the small, light and quiet qualities of the X-Pro2 are calling me.

@Average user .......Using the D750, what can you compare the low light performance to? I went to Pentax 7 years ago for better low light performance from Canon, now that D750 sensor looks like "the cats pyjamas" for doing a few weddings and I enjoy low light work as well. How many stops of usable performance does it bring? I went from 16mp on the K5iis to the 24 mp K3, which I don't really like .... happily trade the k3 in and get something with mega low light performance.

@PeteGrady: Fujifilm X-Pro2 can not be directly compared to DSLRs or pure mirror less system cameras. It really shines in street photography when using WA and normal primes, but for other types of subjects the OVF does not work as well and is redundant if using the EVF. Surely the IQ is great etc, but one actually needs a real reason to choose it over the Fujifilm X-T1 for example (or the coming X-T2). I had the X-Pro1 and it gave me a fresh start in photography, but I have traded it in for a second T-X1 body with no regrets.

In addition to a couple of nice sounding cameras, the announcement timing was a shrewd move by Nikon's PR department. Canon doesn't announce DSLRs at CES, so Nikon had the "camera floor" to themselves.

Having now had a close look, it is clear that the focusing capabilities of the D500 and D5 should prove to be an amazing improvement on anything else Nikon to date has produced and for anyone into demanding action, especially professionals, they must be jumping with joy.

I like to look at DP Review to see what equipment has become available and how the technology has advanced but it will take me a hell of a lot of persuasion to move on from my D300. That is because for landscapes in good light I do not need any better.

However, the asking price for the D500 should prove to be very good value for money, especially once that drops, which eventually it is likely to do. The D5 is so much more expensive, it is difficult to judge about that, but professionals will not be too worried.

It will be interesting to see if the quality of the best action photos put before the public takes a giant leap forward. I would not rule that out by any means but we will have to wait and see. Let's hope so.

Really? ANOTHER article about the new Nikons? How many articles do you people plan to write about these two new cameras DPreview? Yeah, I get it . . . it's big news. Still, I've seen more than three articles on here in the past week! I don't like the whole overload of articles about these two cameras, when there are cameras about which you haven't posted ANYTHING. Two articles I could take. But three in a week or two? REALLY?

Remember the times when photography enthusiasts raved about large viewfinders, dedicated buttons, grip comfort, good AF, great ISO and DR, fast framerate, great metering, fast lenses and people did not mind carrying the weight and paying the price ?

Now everyone raves about cameras with LCD's for viewfinders, with abysmal battery life that can't focus properly on a moving subject and call DSLR's outdated.

Heck, a guy even said he prefers his S6 samsung to the Nikon D5.

I am stunned to read comments around here and to think this is the direction in which the camera market and photography trends are going.

I guess you're not embracing the new technology as much as others. No big deal. Maybe you will find solace in a new website about optical digital cameras that might come into existence in the future, just as there are websites about analog cameras today for film users.

It's not unfortunate that there are lots of us amateurs who buy the cameras too...the volume we buy helps finance the cutting edge technologies that help you. In fact if pros are so much smarter than us, then I recommend pros comments be more constructive to help amateurs get better...it makes for a stronger consumer group all together.

At the best, feeding an old racehorse can be an act of compassion - to save it from dying. Pushing the boundaries of “DSLR” is simply that. No more it can rejuvenate the old horse to the level of sprinting and galloping. Either evolve a new technology or strengthen the latest of the existing technology. LOOK FORWARD AND INNOVATE is the key. The only way for any professional conglomerate to survive; Or else? We have too many bad examples already: Kodak for instance.

Mate, what are you on about ? DSLR's run rings around mirorless cameras in performance and ergonomics, mirorless cameras need to "innovate" with various gizmos just to seem like they are an alternative for DSLR's to the tech oriented enthusiasts.

Wrong Nico. What DSLR can shoot at 15 fps? There are multiple mirrorless cameras that can do that. You talk about ergonomics, but some of the Fuji camera users I've encountered in the Sigma camera forum seem to LOVE the ergonomics of their Fuji mirrorless cameras, even better than their Sigma SD1 bodies, which is one of the most ergonomic camera bodies in existence.

You mention that mirrorless cameras "need to innovate" . . . but that is EXACTLY what they are all about. Every new mirrorless camera is an innovation over the previous one. Just look at the new Sony mirrorless cameras, and you will get a taste. Have you even looked closely at the A7r II? (It's not for me, because I like to have a GPS and a fully-articulating screen, but it sure is one amazing camera.)

Yeah, 15 fps without focus, who needs that ?! My iPad probably shoots faster than my nikon but there's not comparison otherwise. Ergonomics means having a great viewfinder, a good grip on the camera, dedicated buttons for the main functions, good battery life, and mirorless cameras are mostly poor at that. The A7 does look like it's nice to hold but having an electronic viewfinder and poor battery life would not make it my first choice. And it's all downhill from there, how pleasurable is it to hold a fuji for an extended amount of time ? How nice is it to use such an EVF in a low light scenario. The guys from DPR jokingly tried to walk looking thru a EVF in a dark parking lot and they got dizzy from the lag. I might be overly picky because I rely on my cameras for work but I feel that people that dismiss DSLR's never even picked one or don't have any interest in serious photography. I, on the other hand, did try some mirrorless cameras from Samsung, Oly and Nikon and were terrible.

Well, I really don't understand what is holding Canikon to take mirrorless more seriously. DSLR is not bad, I like it, but Mirrorless with EVF clearly has a lot of fans. Why is Canikon not tapping this market? Is that so hard to ditch the dedicated AF? Or the problem is the lens mount? Or it is because the market is shrinking so much that they don't see much value to invest in a new set of tech?

These comments only demonstrate hatred, intolerance and lack of knowledge of the real market for digital camera for photography professionals. Video game players should look for more suitable places to talk nonsense.

Hi friends, For a great photographer, the exact model of the photographic tool has never been a hindrance in producing his masterpieces. However, while enabling the masses to achieve reliable & decent performance, which is where one needs to acknowledge the value of the latest technology. I am amused when people get so nostalgic & emotional about the technological tools that we were using yesterday. Indeed, we MUST be grateful to DSLR technology – which enabled all willing amateurs in the recent past. However, today is the era of cellphone technology, achieving equally good results from any willing kid too - without much effort. While keeping up with such healthy evolution, if at all I need a new tool, then sorry, it CANNOT be the same old DSLR technology anymore. If the CANONIKON conglomerates keep you happy by their tweaks, be happy - I have no complaints!!

What a load of rubbage, "At the best, feeding an old racehorse can be an act of compassion - to save it from dying. Pushing the boundaries of “DSLR” is simply that. No more it can rejuvenate the old horse to the level of sprinting and galloping. "Then you say: "I am amused when people get so nostalgic & emotional about the technological tools that we were using yesterday" Pot, meet kettle.Consider: you're buying cameras that still haven't caught up with the tech from Canon-Nikon, made buy companies fighting over the remaining scraps. I have no complaints either.

It's true that what trully brought photos to the masses is the cellphone. Arguably, there's no other time in history that so much pictures were taken. Also is true that you can get impressive photos from a cellphone and you can even get a living just from that. But this doesn't mean cell phone can take any kind of picture.

There's so much picture styles that can be explored and taken that no cellphone can ever dream to deliver. DSRL or MILC can deliver those with so much ease and grace, that it's hardly a techonology from yesterdar.

Also, "without much effort" is so not true. If you really want to push any picture boundaries you have to do much, much effort, study many aspects of photos, regardless of any tool you're using. Actually, you need to put even more effort if you want to take great pictures from a cellphone.

DSLR vs Mirrorless.... Blah blah blah.... Pointless arguing. The way I see it any advancement in technology can only be better for you an I, we are spoilt for sheer choice of tools to use, pro or enthusiast.

The D500 looks like a really good shooter. Cant wait to see the results of this sensor coupled with the awesome Sigma 18-35 f1.8 Art. Clean smooth high ISO milky way shots galore.

What is strange is that so much mirrorless fans that comes in this forum and starts to say those camera are BS. I mean, they like the tech very much and don't like canikon lines, I get it. But why in the world would someone comes to a d5/d500 forum just to say why mirrorless is good and why dslr is a dinosaur tech and bla bla bla? I think too that canikon needs to innovate more, but at least in a preview forum I'd like to stick a bit more about the gear itself... Having said that, d500 shows a little of the innovation posture from Nikon. They need more if they even dream to really captivate new generations or the mirrorless audience. A little bit of advantage in AF or blackout won't cut it. But as far as I'm concerned, it seems to be just the perfect camera for many bird photographers. I bet the mirrorless influence really made Nikon try to "push the boundaries", so yeah, I agree that for customers it's just nice we're having these rivalties.

It's always funny to read people comparing DSLRs and Mirrorless... These no comparaison, for the moment, today, DSLRs stay the right tool for professional that work on sport, wedding, children portrait etc...

While you're not working in photography in that activities you cannot understand how important are reliability, battery life, accuracy and very good viewfinder.

I've used mirrorless, and I can say without hesitation that it is not enough good for my work (wedding, portrait & lifestyle). My D810 is an outstanding tool, I'm not always on to try new features, it do what I want and it do it very perfectly. No need to be worry on the battery life, backup shots on a second slot, very good ergonomics and perfect handheld...

These 2 body's are made for pros. And pros knows what is important.

Mirrorless are future, but future stay future and work don't wait for you to have the future tool.

Considering how the forum is going, I'm amazed that no one commented anything yet. Well, I'm not profissional, I own a Nikon, but I don't think that mirrorless would not work for any professional work. I mean, there are times that battery is not that important right? Isn't anyone around using Sony or m43 around you? At least for video? In my country Sony or m43 is not really an option (the stores don't really offer them), so I would dare to say 99% of professionals use canikon, but I'm curious how it is going outside my country. Anyway, d5/d500 really seems to be a monster reliable machine. But are the professionals excited about it?

Like I said, I've tested the two solutions. I didn't say that it was impossible to work with mirrorless, I've just said that it's not, FOR ME, the perfect tool for the moment.

For video, mirrorless are far better, that's why I've used a GH3/A7S, they do everything better for video. But, for stills, especially reportage/sport, I think they aren't ready. If you shoot products, maybe A7R/II is a no brainer camera. But what about a wedding ? Sport report ? If you have just a problem with a memory card, all your shots are lost...

I like what Nikon do here, pro body's with new features. This is come from mirrorless. Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus push Nikon in the right direction, and that's the good point at the end. Look at what they made with the D750, a lightweight compact full frame camera, with articulated screen, WiFi, zebras, flat profile etc... Really mirrorless style !

I think that you need to use the right tool for the right job, that's all :)

Ok this is how it works, no more then 15mp APSC full frame 20mp for sports 28 for weddings thats it ,any more then this quality goes west.Now that been said if you do hand held photography imagestabilizers = mp ,and if you can't track focus for sports birds well junk.I'm very happy for nikon to make the D5 looks great ,and super happy they made the D500 .No i'm not a nikon shooter but i will say nice things about them because i don't shoot nikon lol seems that a lot of nikon guy like to slame mirrorless cameras all the time not sure why.Maybe they will put a LVF in a SLR (Canon Nikon )some day that would be very cool.

I note that the eyepoint relief on the Nikon D500 has been reduced to 16mm from the 19.5mm on the Nikon D300. As the far edges of the viewfinder on my D300 are only just visible wearing glasses I expect the D500 will be unusable using them. Yes, you can get prescription eyepieces but then you can't see the figures or screen on the camera without putting you glasses back on. Nikon has probably eliminated 30% of its potential market for the D500 by this simple oversight.

The debate on the Nikon D5 and D500 releases seems to be dominated by the DSLR versus mirrorless argument. These new cameras have mirrors, end of that story for the time being. What we should be doing is debating how good a job these new cameras will do. One of the central arguments for DSLR's is the advantages of their optical viewfinders. Central to that argument is how good are these particular viewfinders. That is why I raised the issue of eyepiece relief. If the viewfinders have all the bells and whistles but spectacle wearers can't see the full screen because of inadequate eye relief then it would be a fail for the whole camera in my mind. I can't wait for someone to simply pick up the new D500 wearing spectacles and say yes you can see the full screen or no you can't. A simple empirical test that would rule the camera in or out with me and I suspect many others.

I'm not sure what the rating is on the 7d2, but even without glasses I have to strain my eye to see the exposure/flash exposure meter on the right hand side of that viewfinder. They keep on making things more difficult in that regard every release.

I am too poor to switch, but if the competition has a great offering/ product I might get a camera and maybe one lenses to play with. I do like nikon sensor so I am not going anywhere. I did buy a sony a7 plus a lens and a Panasonic milc. All great stuffs, but still with nikon system. Fun to try other things and not be set on one. I do have film cameras too.

For some reason I fear dpr is not going to review these Nikons,don't know which of the two Nikons is going to be ignored.They must be busy from the day they were announced in listing the reasons for not reviewing them.

Huh? You're joking about DPreview not reviewing them, right? They've already written like three articles about them in the past week or so! I think we're going to see both reviews in the next week or two.

I prefer my iPhone 6 :) but I think the subject is a little bit off. I could just say I prefer a5100 with 50mm which would be less than s6, or buy a 5d mark 1 and lens and so on... Maybe you mean that the phone photography is eating dedicated camera market alive, Idk. I presume there's some deep thoughts about the post, if you care to explain...

Rofl. Yes cell cameras are great. You do realize D5 is a specialize equipment meant for one thing. Do you think you can use your cell camera to take the same photos you see in a magazine in the Olympics.

Then.... if you could proof the point. If you are exploring the limit of a mobile, and achieving magazine level photography, I'd like to see that. I woldn't ask you to share the secrets, but I'd like to see what can be achieved.

Maybe so. But I feel that actually what makes this body so special is the system itself. Body is just one part of the equation. Even if Samsung has a better body, the system has not many options to really makes it a better experience. Anyway, I assume you're talking about NX-1. But as far as reviews goes, it is not better than 7D-2. Focus is slower and accuracy is not good when you rack zoom it. The screen goes black while you shoot in burst. Nikon itself seems to be more concerned about A6000. Apart that, I feel that the consensus is that D500, if promises what is advertising, has enough specks to make people change system. I was very tempted by the snap bridge feature. I think only Samsung has got one of those? Should be standard for any camera.

The NX1 is a remarkable camera, but it is close to stop behind the D7200 at high ISO, and not as good as the 7200 at Sports tracking.It is exemplary at many things though, resolution, build, wifi, video, in body VR. etc. I am too invested in the Nikon system to stray, but I would have loved to see what the NX2 would have brought to the table. Samsung dumping it's camera business is the most regrettable news in years, and considering the NX1, one of the least expected. At least they went out with a bang, and not a whimper.

I have not seem a review with this fw 1.4, but I'll take your word as true. NX-1 is really a feature packed camera that I'd like to see Canikon be inspired on. D500 comes somewhat close to that, a bit late, but at least they delivered something interesting enough. Anyway, Samsung system is still not very compelling. A shame, considering their initial lens offerings were more interesting to me than Sony's.

BUT... again, body is only part of the equation. Lens/Accessories/Body are key. D500 has the potential to deliver the very best wildlife/action photo experience than any other system. To say further, I think lenses are far more important than the body itself. Crappy body with good lens is better than awesome body with crappy lens, IMO.

Thank you all for pointing out the Samsung NX1 to me. I looked at it breifly in the past and thought it wasn't what I'd want, because the lenses were not available in a large enough variety (no third party lenses available, for example), and I thought at that time that the tilt screen was not what I wanted, so I didn't take a deep look at it. Now that I have, I'm hoping Samsung steps up their offerings in the future. They could become a competitor, if they do. I hope they don't exit the camera space, like I think they might do. (Their decision to not sell the NX1 in Europe is what makes me think this way.)

Still, there's NO way I would get into a system unless there are plenty of lenses available, like there are for Sony, Canon, and Nikon. I bought a Sigma too, but there are a lot more good lenses available for Sigma cameras than there are for the Samsung NX1. Samsung's longest lens is a 50-200! That just sucks.

It must be said, if you really like camera gear and you pay attention to the engineering that goes into the latest gear, you cannot fail to be impressed with the achievement of the Samsung NX1.

Seriously, it is an EPIC piece of kit and simply one of the most advanced and well designed cameras EVER made. Whoever the Samsung engineers are who created it, they deserve to be recognised, even if brand fanboys and prejudice mean that too many people failed to recognise just how good it is.

Until this Nikon came along, at a pure tech level the NX1 was clearly the leading APSC cam. In many respects I suspect it still betters the D500.

At least on paper nx1 still beats d500. That's for sure. And I liked their approach to not fully invest in the weight/size advantages, as many mirrorless makers do. Instead they apparently tried to pursue more performance and features rather than just pursing small size. Maybe when Sony build a body and lenses that doesn't try to pursue small size so much, then Sony may come up with something (even) more amazing. Anyway, Samsung doesn't seems to be invested in camera. So bad, but do what.

Yeah... Video is not a strong feature. There is many caveats in Nikon Video capabilities. But sometimes I feel that there's no way to compete with micro-thirds in this regard. But hey, they are trying, and that's good for competition.

Okay, so here's my first ever post on DPR. I've been thinking about upgrading from the D7000, which I've had for 4 and a bit years. I've got all of the lenses I'll need ,to cover all of the genre's I'm likely to shoot.(Landscape,Portrait,macro,wildlife/sport)I'm happy to stay with Nikon, and I'm happy to stay DSLR.

So, I look at the 7200 and think "no, I'll wait for the 7300", and then think, should I step up to the D750? (now at £1200, and thats affordable) or even the D810 at £1800. But then I'd have to get at least one more lens, possibly the new 16-80, as my main two lenses are DX.

And now this D500 comes along and throws everything into a massive whirlwind of a dilemma. Common sense says buy the 750. But there's a little demon on my shoulder whispering "D500, D500, D500 you know you want one !"

I WANT A D500!!!!!!!!! It's too expensive but I want one, and I want it now!

It would be a nice step up from the camera you have, giving you 4 MP extra, that tilt screen, and so many nice upgrades (buffer, speed, etc.). I say GO FOR IT! The 16-80 is not a full-frame lens, but it would be really nice on the D500, and it would go with the 80-400 perfectly. In fact, that D500 and those two lenses would make a GREAT kit. Add a Tokina 10-17mm fisheye, and you'd be set for life! (The D7000 would be your back-up body, of course.)

I agree. The D200 and D300 had a pop-up flash, and they were just fine! Nothing wrong with having something like that. Why would they get rid of such a feature? Now I have to carry around an extra thing with me, when I go out and about with my camera and super-zoom lens, if I have the D500. It's a reason to NOT buy it and get the D7200 instead. Stupid Nikon. They can't just do it right. They have to screw up somehow. I know there are some people who would say something like, but the weather sealing is going to be better this way, and that's probably true, but for someone who wants a better all-around everyday camera than the D7200, this D500 could have been it. Now we have to wait for an upgrade, though the D7200 sure is a nice camera with a pretty big buffer. No 4K video though, unfortunately. I guess Nikon wants to hold back and have a way to sell us more cameras in the future.

I have owned the D50, D200, D90 and D7100. I sold my D7100 recently and decided that I am done with Nikon and DSLRs in general. Utterly pointless except for a very small group of professionals who shoot the Olympics, etc.

These "swan song" products for me are more like tombstones. They bring back memories of when I first switched from film to digital and everyone clamored to buy a DSLR.

"Utterly pointless except for a very small group of professionals who shoot the Olympics, etc."

This sounds utterly ridiculous despite 9 likes. Most professionals shoot with DSLR systems. Wedding and event photographers do not use MFT unless they are old and frail and can't hold a full frame cam any longer

Actually, the group IS very small. Almost NOBODY will buy the D5 and only a few more than that will buy a $2,000 DSLR. The future belongs to the mirrorless bodies, which are slowly replacing the DSLR bodies. EVENTUALLY Canon and Nikon will make full-frame mirrorless bodies, which will be capable of doing things that a DSLR could never dream of doing, such as shooting at 20 fps, while offering a view of what is being shot (by showing 3 frames of each shot, because the refresh rate of the electronic viewfinder is 60 fps). They will offer tilting viewfinders and fully-articulating review screens that will display simultaneously - things that can't be done with a DSLR (as far as I know).

But I wouldn't go so far as to say "Utterly pointless . . ." There is a market for a better, new DSLR with an APS-C sensor. There is also a market for a better, new DSLR with a full-frame sensor. There is nothing wrong with a better buffer, more speed, and 4K video capability, is there?

I think "pushing boundaries" means that we finally are starting to see features that have been standard issue in consumer grade compact cameras since 10 years back like WIFI, flip screen etc in all $1500+ DSLRs from Nikon.

other than that, we'll at least they improved something this time instead of just bugfixing like they done with all their x10-models..

Yeah, I don't really understand why is so hard to put those features in a "top-end camera". It really should be the other way around. Idk... maybe they need to test first in a less "serious" camera, so they don't risk to put it in a "pro" camera. Maybe they are holding tech so they can introduce in an upgrade, thus always making small upgrades. Anyway, competition and a declining market is forcing companies to stop holding tech. I hope we see major leap forwards for all camera companies this year.

You want to know why seemingly simple things like flip-screens aren't usually on top of the line cameras? Its because they are hard to toughen. Drop a consumer camera with the flippy screen out and watch as it likely breaks off, you can't have that kind of thing happening with a six thousand dollar camera. As for wifi, I don't know why they are only putting them into high end cameras now, maybe they thought reliability would be an issue.

Drop a $6,000 camera and it will break. Just because the review screen flips out does not make it impossible to break. Besides, when was the last time you heard about a flip-out screen breaking? I've had five digital still cameras now that had flip-out screens (one from Canon, one from Nikon, and three from Sony), and NONE of them ever had a problem with the flip-out screen. I had a few video cameras with flip-out screens over the years too, and I never had a problem with one of those screens either. The whole idea that the flip-out screen is going to be a problem is a stupid idea and photographers need to get over it. I think they are. We see a LOT more cameras with them these days, and almost everyone who tries a camera with that feature likes it.

Pushing the boundaries of DSLR? - DSLR maybe, but photography has been travelling since 2009, CaNikon are on the CaNikon bus while photographers worldwide are getting on the mirrorless bus to see boundaries pushed. Nikon says, "WE ARE the future!" Does anyone believe that?

If you aim to make the best camera in this segment you need to use the currently best technology. And that is what Nikon does. Maybe mirrorless will catch up some day, although getting the electrical viewfinder to display the natural DR of the scene, or work at the speed of light seems to be difficult.

Nikon knows. They showed a side by side comparison that showed the superiority of an OVF during an action sequence at the presentation of the cameras. As they said on an earlier occasion. "This is formula One - we cant have second best solutions".

@surleziKiddo, try using EVF to shoot action, animals or anything else in dark environments.If you are shooting landscapes or people not moving in the middle of the day, fine and good for you. But please do not assume that everybody else is too.EVF in examples above are junk and that is proven by the fact that NOBODY is using them in those conditions. Not to mention the fact that anything that has an EVF has abysmal AF tracking that is akin to DSLR AF in 1980s ;)

OVF is old, sure, but it has got some strenghts in shootings, as the folks there pointed out. For me, the important strength that OVF is supported by Canikon. It's hard to just let the lens and accessories selection go. As much as I'd like the exposure, histogram and other infos in my viewfiender, the lens are more important for me. This is a trade off that I can live with. Sure lens selection is going to improve, but then I can switch system.

I'm sorry, but I don't think the A77 II has abysmal AF tracking that is acin to DSLR AF in the 1980s . . . or even in the 1990s. In fact, I've read that it's actually better than the Nikon D300s, which many people have been so happy with for so long.

No, the A77 II is not mirrorless, but that camera has an EVF, which works just fine for shooting action. I shoot with an A65, which is fine for shooting action, and it shoots as fast as the Nikon D500. I don't think you really know what you're talking about Der Steppenwolf.

They just showed what is common knowledge - that EVFs stutter, the "dreaded slideshow effect" when shooting at the fastest fps with EVFs, while the view in the OVF is perfectly stable and works at the speed of light. Remember, this is about professional cameras for action.

surlezi,You understand the context here? We are talking about sports and action cameras. You know that you need a fast shutter speed to stop action? If the light is enough for a fast shutter speed, you can see perfectly in an OVF.

PerLYou understand a good EVF only lags in very low light ? If the light is enough for a fast shutter speed, a good EVF doesn't lag.

Moreover there is no such thing as "enough light for fast shutter", cause there is another parameter called ISO (sensitvity), and if you can increase it in a usuable manner then it allows you that much more speed.

Well, it's hard to beat OVF if the point is to follow fast action. Any other situation EVF is better, with live exposure preview, histogram, with the added bonus that it shares the same AF as the Live View.

Having said that, OVF is still good enough to take pictures in general, of course. It's not that a ground breaking tech that would change the way we take picture, as it was when we went digital. But it's a tech that most probably will replace EVF.

A7R II are to small for my hands. And use mirrorless Sony in nature is not right element for that camera either. Who cares about the size, I use digital Hasselblad in the forrest for years, so for me DSLRs are quite small,from my point of view :-)

@enenzoUntil mirrorless has an AF that can actually track and battery time worth mentioning people that shoot anything that moves are forced to use DSLR.In future that might change, but remember we are living and using cameras in the present.

@Der SteppenwolfI believe many reviews of the Sony A7R M2 clearly stats that it's AF system offer benefits over high-end DSLRs. And regarding battery life. That should not keep you from buying the camera of the future :-) The future is now...

Small cameras with cold hands, never. I know what I'm doing with my time in forrest so I never want to use Sony cameras! And still the battery time is crappy. I stay with DSLRs. Never fails, and as an scientist I need gears that works in rough enviroment!

The future IS mirrorless. But it's not here yet. There isn't a mirrorless camera in existence that can compete with a D5/500 or 1DX/7D2 for action photography. People who shoot those for a living can't afford to miss shots while the EVF lag has them pointing the camera in the wrong direction.

Mirrorless is there. It actually fits better for many people. The only remaining point is when Canikon will enter the trend seriously. The lens, tradition and reliability still holds ground for them, but Idk for how long. Nevertheless, althought it is really nice to have small size, real time exposure preview, historgram, etc, I'm not sure if I really misses it to make good shot. I mean, the size advantage is only valid until you start to make large apertures lenses, don't use flashes or other accessories. The exposure is nice but you kinda get used to take shot without it. So... what I mean is that DSLR with OVF is not that bad, neither mirrorless is so revolutionary. In the end, IQ is not a concern for either (considering the same sensor size).

P. S.: here is what I believe as well - Canon lost, in my opinion, a lot of time (betting on "if ain't broke, don't fix it..." Sensor fab/factory wise), but the shareholders are happy. What impact this will have in the near future, we will see (I don't expect a miracle in the 1D-X 2, but even so, with the D5 out, it will be very difficult).

1. Out of the 153 AF points, only 55 are selectable and when looking at the AF area coverage on full frame, I would have expected more stretch esp. on center area up/down axis. It is barely better than current crop of Nikon pro bodies or Canon 1Dx. I made a short comparison of AF areas against my trusty 1Dx http://kaurilves.com/clients/D5_1Dx_AF.jpg It remains to be seen how much real life keepers the "invisible" AF points on D5 contribute to. Btw, invisible AF points have been available on various earlier camera bodies, like 5D, which had 6 invisible AF assist points in servo mode :)

2. Who have shot the sports know that using any automated algorithm for tracking across the frame is very prone to errors, especially if the scene is more complicated than simple subject against clear background, which it usually is :) It falls almost always back to either a single point or zone AF tracking.

I was wondering about how these AF points differ from those assist points - good point.

As for the selectable points - 55 is enough for me, especially because on Nikons I rarely select my own AF point anyway. I use the center point to 'define' my subject & let 3D tracking do the rest as I recompose or my subject moves. So as long as 3D tracking is capable of selecting those assist points on the D5/500...

Sports doesn't represent the sum total of use-cases that benefit from tracking; in fact, like you said, most sports photographers revert to single point AF, though some do successfully use 3D tracking to follow subjects and enable the ability to quickly recompose when a player changes direction, for example.

What Nikon really should've done is improve the functionality of 3D tracking. A button to temporarily revert to single point AF-C would allow one to continue Z-depth tracking while stopping the X-Y tracking momentarily. That'd make 3D tracking exponentially better.

The acid test to conduct is to have experienced action shooter shoot side-by-side with D5 and upcoming 1Dx II. Ideally it should cover various types of sports and subject-backgroung combos. I have a suspicion that both bodies will do a excellent job (and fail sometimges) and it is more of a personal preference of the camera body ergonomics and existing lenses than outright features of different bodies.

DSLRs are still bricks. The D5 is 1415g. An A7R II is 640g. And that's with IBIS in the A7R II. For those of us who like to carry two bodies, you can carry two A7R II's for the same weight and space of a single D5. The D5 is also double the price of an A7R II. Two very different beasts. A lot of people who are moving to mirrorless are doing so because they want to shed the weight and size of DSLR gear, such as the D5.

:) Be prepared..Soon the migthy 1DX Mk II and the 5D Mk IV will just pop up, and those Canon bodies will bring balance in Force in the DSLR Universe..Yes, they are the chosen ones, the very last hope of the Canonian Galaxy, to save the Universe from the evil Dark Side! :D

Rishi, the buffer of the D500 is not 200 shots (slide 1): Nikon is quoting the maximum number of continuous shots that can be taken, and this number is very high if using a fast XQD card.

The buffer capacity, however, is the number shown in the viewfinder before shooting, which is the size of its memory divided by the size of a RAW file. This number is not absolute (it changes with the ISO setting), but even in the best case scenario we are talking an order of magnitude of difference with the number you are quoting: see http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57053571.

Bottom line: you should call Nikon out on their marketing shenanigans, the revolutionary thing here is the XQD interface, not the size of the buffer.

Possibly the OP's initial point was that we should test with both the best and worst card, with the latter giving us an indication of the actual buffer size (leaving out the part where the camera quickly transfers data from the buffer to the card so it can make some more room in its buffer for more shots).

Because with a good XQD card, Horshack says the 200 shot buffer is very much real.

I’ll try to make my point clearer, but first let me elaborate a little on the concepts of “buffer size” and “maximum burst”.

The former, as I mentioned in my previous post, is the size of the memory in the camera that has the job of storing the pictures while they wait to be written to the card(s), measured in number of shots (since the manufacturers are not kind enough to provide the actual size in MB). This number is the one you see - estimated - in the viewfinder while shooting, and it is conservative, since it does not take into account that the camera will start writing to the card as soon as you start shooting, therefore making space for more shots. The latter does not need an explanation, and it is by definition greater or equal than the buffer depth.

Why is this difference important? First because we should call things for what they are :), but also because mixing one with the other can be confusing, and can lead to the wrong answer when we ask “why is this camera better?”. I’ve seen several people understandably draw the conclusion that the D500 must have a lot of memory in its buffer. But how big is it really? Let’s do some back-of-the-envelope calculations.

Horshack mentions that the camera slowed down after 74 shots, indicating that the buffer was full, with a 260MB/s SD card. A quick Google search reveals that the one card with that reading speed is a Toshiba, and its maximum write speed is 240MB/s. The other variable we need is the size of a RAW file, and we don’t have it: let’s make an educated guess based on 7d2 files and say that it’s 30MB. So we have:

To have something to compare it with, the same exercise for the 7d2 (but with certainty on the file size, since I own the camera) gave me a an estimated buffer size of 484MB.

These numbers are very comparable, and hint strongly to the fact that the great maximum burst performance of the D500 is to be attributed entirely to the fast XQD/SD interfaces, and not to a particularly large buffer. It is also worth noting that 468/30 = 15.6, not far from the number that Horshack saw in the D500 viewfinder (14). The D5 instead reported 99 shots, which would suggest that its buffer has indeed grown considerably in size.

As a final point, a bit of sensitivity analysis, since we made an assumption on the files sizes: the same calculations with 25MB and 35MB files yield respectively a buffer size of 98MB (unlikely) and 838MB, which is still not that for from the one of the 7d2.

Excellent explanation, thank you. I actually understood all of that. I would still hesitate to call it "shenanigans", that implies Nikon is trying to deceive, more a question of semantics, because whether they speeded up the throughput or increased the buffer size, the net result is the same when using the faster card, which Nikon points out in its literature.

I just can't see how either of these cameras pushes any boundaries... The D5 seems like a small incidental upgrade to the D4 which is a camera really only useful to sports shooters. As far as the D500, does anyone buy a cropped sensor camera these days? I guess it's nice to have options, but I still don't see any boundaries being pushed here compare to Sony, Panasonic, Leica, and Phase who are truly making major leaps in design and features. Glad to see Nikon still trying though.

It's almost as if there's a correlation between market share of a company and the amount of boundary-pushing they're attempting. :)

My opinion wrt to Nikon: 153 AF points, 99 cross-sensors, automated AF Fine Tune, 3D tracking with double the resolution metering sensor cross-referencing data from the AF module which now has its own processor to process distance information from all 153 points - these are seriously pushing DSLR boundaries by addressing the areas where DSLRs have shortcomings in comparison to mirrorless cameras, while widening the lead in areas where DSLRs excel compared to mirrorless (burst shooting, and continuous AF during bursts).

NOBODY KNOWS! Until we see frames and video, it is all a bunch of hypothetical specification nonsense. I own a TON of nikon glass and I shoot for a living. Even so, I have seen comparisons of the sony low light, low noise solutions that blow canon and nikon out of the water—as in NO COMPARISON. I am hoping Nikon has turned a corner on noise reduction. Nobody is going to shoot at 3.2 million ISO, but will the frames be cleaner at, say 10,000 ISO? I shoot a TON at low light, but I simply do NOT want Sony anything. Their design and style make me cringe. Am I pleased the D5 has 4K video? Absolutely. There is no question if the spec's we read deliver the goods IN THE FRAMES, this is worth $8400 in Canada. I can make that back in 8 days of shooting. It is clear the D5 is currently unfinished. Until we see the frames; until we can review noise from low light shots, we're all just shovelling sh*t against the tide with these (currently) pointless arguments. C'mon March! I'm counting the days.

And incidenkally (and as I am sure this comment will upset everyone with an EM1)...Until the EM1 is a full-size sensor, it is out of place comparing ANY features of autofocus at 10 frames et al with a full sensor capture to a Nikon D5 (or D4) or the equivalent Canon gear. There is no relevant comparable side by side capture quality that a pro can use—not when we're talking about professional rigs. Obnoxious to mention, but true.

Just saying that the E-M1's continuous AF system isn't likely to keep up with the D500's, especially not in continuous bursts, and furthermore there's the unquestionable issue surrounding following subjects during continuous bursts with a live optical feed vs. a stop-motion playback of last shot images. There's also the issue of the E-M1 up against possibly the best subject tracking system in the world (Nikon 3D tracking), so the comparison against the E-M1 is largely irrelevant.

My EM-1 does an admirable job, but cannot match the speed of focusing in low light, or the outright precision, that I can achieve with either the D700 or the D7200. I would expect the D500 to outperform all of them. Where I need only focus on action moving across my field of view, the EM-1 is impressive, refocusing and buffering a high-speed burst; but once the action starts moving fore and aft, all bets are off. ...and the lower the light, the worse it gets.

The D500 seems more exciting as a sports and action camera than the D5 due to its wider spread of AF points. I really don't know why Nikon don't offer it with a built in vertical grip as an option. If it's anything like my D800 was, the add on grip is bulkier and doesn't handle as well as the dedicated built in grip (at least compared to my old D3s).

Look like cracking cameras though (subject to the focus points actually focussing correctly)

The only thing that this highlights is that the crop of cameras available right now are so good. All the improvements, impressive as they are, are incremental. And it seems the amount of R&D needed to get to these incremental upgrades is quite a lot.

That leaves the question: what is needed for a major step up next and are the R&D costs needed outweigh the possible result in sales?

I think we need different kind of colour reproduction next. For instance, the Sigma Faveon technology delivers us something quite different. There are severe limitations right now to that technology.

Unless you want crop, scorching autofocus tracking and 10fps for wildlife, in which case the D500 hits it for six over the clubhouse and under a bus. I think market has moved on since the D200/300. now with entry level full frame around 1000 Quid and lower, for me D610 /750 are better general purpose SLR's I am a D200 to D300 upgrader, but probably won't upgrade to a D500 (although il check see how it reviews)

I asked this in the other story but I thought I'd ask here to see if other people have more insight:

I don't want to buy a whole bunch of expensive XQD cards but for fast write speeds it would be good to have one in the camera. Is it possible to transfer images, within the camera, from the XQD after you take a bunch in a burst, to the SD card in the other slot, and then delete them in the XQD card ready to take more bursts?

Yes, that is what I do with my current D4. A 32Meg XQD and a 32Meg CF card in it. They never leave the body. I hook up the D4 to a laptop and commence downloads. Do the same with a D800 (64M Flash and CF card.) The second cards are backup cards as the camera writes to both cards at the same time.

One thing the D500 announcement has done is made me think again about DX.

Like many, I was a D300 user and I loved that thing.

But here is the thing - It has also made me realise how attractive the D7200 has become. Wow - the IQ from that camera is exceptional. In some circumstance, given its lack of an AA filter, it gives the D750 a run for its money.

This winds me back in time to when I first heard the news of the D3/D300 duo [the latter of which I bought within a few months], which was the last time I felt really enthused by new cameras from Nikon.

I've moved on a few times since then and the last few years have seen my picture taking shift mainly to the use of MFT cameras. I don't think I'm going back, but I do feel a bit of Nikon envy with these cameras and those who've stuck with the marque appear to be in for a real treat. It can only be good news for the photographer that we're seeing such strong product development from all over the market.

I didn't see much information as to the sensor used here. One of Sony's? BSI? Stacked? The 20.1mp and the ISO ranges would suggest bigger, fatter pixels than on other DX cameras. It would be great to see a step up in sensor performance from the D7200, which are actually great as they are. Something approaching "full frame" performance would be a breakthrough.

Both Nikon Japan and Canon Japan have warned users that forthcoming DSLRs will be delayed. The 100th anniversary edition of Nikon’s D5 has been put back by a couple of weeks, and Canon's 6D Mark II/EF 24-70mm F4L kit in Japan is also delayed.

A Belgian camera shop is showing off an extremely rare, limited 'Rex Edition' Nikon D500. The cosmetic alterations were provided by a customer's German Shepherd Rex, who got ahold of the camera within a day of its purchase.

The launch of the D7500 presents an interesting quandary for camera buyers: should I buy the D500 or save some money and get the D7500? We look at the key differences so you can decide for yourself. Read more

Latest in-depth reviews

Panasonic's premium compact DC-ZS200 (TZ200 outside of North America) boasts a 24-360mm equiv. F3.3-6.4 zoom lens, making it the longest reaching 1"-type pocket camera on the market. There are tradeoffs that come with that big lens, however. Find out all the details in our in-depth review.

The Hex Raven DSLR bag holds a ton of gear and employs a low-profile design that doesn't scream "I'm a camera bag." We think it's a little too bulky for everyday use, but makes for a great option when traveling with a lot of gear.

The Sony a7 III sets a new benchmark for full-frame cameras thanks to its compelling combination of value and capability. It's at home shooting everything from sports to portraits, and is one of the most impressive all-around cameras we've seen in a long while. Find out all the details in our full review.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for a parent? The best cameras for shooting kids and family must have fast autofocus, good low-light image quality and great video. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for parents, and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for taking pictures of people and events? Reliable autofocus, good image quality in low light, and great colors straight from the camera are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting people and events, and recommended the best.

The new HP DesignJet Z6 and Z9+ supposedly offer "the fastest printing capabilities available on the market today," all while using fewer ink tanks, and featuring useful add-ons like a built-in vertical trimmer.

In an effort to streamline production and minimize confusion, RED has announced that it is simplifying its product lineup to three main cameras. As an added bonus, this change dramatically drops the prices for all three options.

Fujifilm's new X-T100 is an SLR-style mirrorless camera that takes the internals of the X-A5, including phase-detect AF, and adds a fully articulating LCD and high-res OLED viewfinder. The X-T100 is priced at a very reasonable $599/€599 body-only and $699/€699/£619 with a 15-45mm lens.

Panasonic's latest firmware update for its GH5S, GH5 and G9 series of cameras was leaked in Japan earlier today and is now being officially announced a week early. But don't get too excited – you still won't be able to download it until May 30th.

We've been saying for years that the term "lens compression" is misleading, but Lee Morris over at Fstoppers has put together a useful video that explains why this is the case, and demonstrates it with two easy-to-understand examples.

Last week, some 'leaked' photos were published online that purported to show a DJI Phantom 5 drone with interchangeable lens camera and several prime lenses. The rumor was widely reported, but DPReview has learned that those images do not, in fact, show a Phantom 5 at all.

Award-winning fashion and celebrity photographer Markus Klinko recently tested out the Godox EC-200 flash extension head. Actually, he tested out four of them, creating a quad-flash ring light alternative that works great for both beauty and close-up work.

According to a recent investor presentation, Sony intends to occupy the top slot in the overall camera market by the end of 2020, beating back Canon and Nikon by boosting its interchangeable lens systems.

Google has finally added the ability to mark your favorite images in Google Photos, so they can be filtered into a dedicated album. The service is also planning to a social network-like "heart" button that lets you like other people's photos.

We've been messing around with Apollo, an iOS app that allows you to add 3D lighting effects to images using depth information, and have to say we're impressed with what it's capable of – but that doesn't mean we don't have a few requests for the next version.

The new lightweight laptop packs a whole lot of photo- and video-editing punch. The laptop can be specced out with a Core i9 processor, 16GB of RAM, 1TB of SSD storage, NVIDIA graphics with 4GB of GDDR5, and a 4K display with 100% Adobe RGB coverage.

It looks like Canon is getting into sensor sales. The three specialized CMOS sensors the company recently demoed—including a 120MP APS-H model and an ultra-low light sensor—have been listed for sale through a distributor in the US.

Kodak Alaris has launched a new single-use disposable camera in Europe. Called the Kodak Daylight Single Use Camera, this 800 ISO film camera is supposedly ideal for parties, weddings, and similar events.

Computer vision company Lucid and cinema camera maker RED have partnered to create an 8K 3D camera that can capture 4-view (4V) holographic images and video in real-time. The camera is designed to work with RED's upcoming holographic Hydrogen One smartphone.

If Canon and Nikon do get into high-end mirrorless, it's almost certain that they'll do everything they can to maintain compatibility with their existing mounts. But, asks Richard Butler, wouldn't it be more interesting if they built a small, niche system to live alongside their existing DSLRs?

You know that feeling when you're already all suited up and out on a spacewalk outside the International Space Station, and only then do you realize you forgot to put the SD card in your GoPro? No? Us either... but one astronaut on the ISS sure does.

From 2015 to 2017, filmmaker Macgregor and his crew spend many months traveling back and forth on the famed Mauritanian Railway—the so-called 'Backbone of the Sahara—to document the grueling journey endured by merchants who regularly travel atop this train. This beautifully-executed short doc is the result.

Synology has added a new 6-bay NAS to its DiskStation+ series, and it's aimed squarely at photographers and medium sized businesses. The DS1618+ can handle up to six 12TB drives, giving it a max capacity of 72TB, or up to 60TB in RAID 5.

Our original gallery for Tamron's new 70-210mm F4 had portraits, slow-moving wildlife and city scenes, but was sorely missing fast action. We remedied that by photographing some motorcycles flying through the air.

This week on DPReview TV, Chris and Jordan prepare for the summer holiday season by putting several popular waterproof cameras to the test. If you're considering a rugged camera for the beach or pool this summer, or if you just want to see what a Chris and Jordan fishing show might look like, tune in.

Soulumination is a non-profit organization that provides life-affirming legacy photography to families facing serious medical conditions, completely free of charge. This video shares the work they are doing.

Fujifilm EU seems to have accidentally leaked an unreleased camera to the masses. The leaked page details a new "X-T100" camera that will share most of its specs with the X-A5, but includes an EVF, deeper buffer, and 3-way tilting touchscreen.

LA-based director and cinematographer Phil Holland of PHFX recently joined forces with Gotham Film Works to create something out-of-this-world. Using a special aerial camera array, Holland shot a flyover of New York City using not one, not two, but three 8K RED Weapon Monstro VistaVision cameras.